Eco-Capabilities: Arts-in-Nature for Supporting Nature Visibilisation and Wellbeing in Children

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Excellent piece of research and an easy to understand presentation of findings.

Line 38 - indicate over what time span the 90% reduction in outside play has taken place.

Line 90 - suggest stating what the terms 'eudaimonic' and 'hedonic' refer to - for the non-specialist reader.

Pages 8-10 - is each pair of pre and post intervention images  by the same child - so is 2a and 2b by one child, and 3a and 3b by another child? Or they each made by different children?

As a suggestion only: is it possible to say something about what the observations and findings suggest about any improvement in the relationships between the children, and between the children and adults, as a result of this intervention. There seems to be some hint of that in the comments about wellbeing - I wonder if this was ever made explicit.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for these constructive comments, we very much appreciate the time taken to provide them. We respond to them individually below (comment in black and response in purple), with changes to the manuscript highlighted using track changes.

Line 38 - indicate over what time span the 90% reduction in outside play has taken place.

We have added in the detail, as requested (now line 47).

Line 90 - suggest stating what the terms 'eudaimonic' and 'hedonic' refer to - for the non-specialist reader.

We have added in a very brief description, as suggested (now lines 106-107).

Pages 8-10 - is each pair of pre and post intervention images by the same child - so is 2a and 2b by one child, and 3a and 3b by another child? Or they each made by different children?

These images were drawn by different children; we have edited this to clarify in the appropriate figure captions.

As a suggestion only: is it possible to say something about what the observations and findings suggest about any improvement in the relationships between the children, and between the children and adults, as a result of this intervention. There seems to be some hint of that in the comments about wellbeing - I wonder if this was ever made explicit.

Thank you for this comment, you are right that there was strong evidence across the project that the arts-in-nature practice supported the development of relationships between children, and between children and adults. As a result, ‘relationality: human’ is one of the eight eco-capabilities we argue the practice develops in children and young people.  We explore the developing relationships between children and children, and children and adults in another paper (Walshe et al., 2022) – this is referenced in a number of places, particularly line 233.  

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors!

 

I enjoyed reading your article. It should be noted that I am pleased with both the text itself and the design of the article. In addition, the topic you have stated is extremely relevant in today's society.

 

The only thing I would advise is to describe the annotation to the text a little more in detail (since the reader, as a rule, begins acquaintance with the article from the annotation. This is where it often ends)).

In addition, the abstract could describe in a few words the possible application of your research, and I would also like to see the research methods.

 

I wish you success in your scientific work

Author Response

Thank you very much for these constructive comments, we very much appreciate the time taken to read our submission and are grateful for your positive comments. We respond to them individually below (comment in black and response in purple), with changes to the manuscript highlighted using track changes.

The only thing I would advise is to describe the annotation to the text a little more in detail (since the reader, as a rule, begins acquaintance with the article from the annotation. This is where it often ends)).

Thank you for your comment. Whilst we understand your concerns, if we further elaborate around each of our direct quotations this will make the article extremely long which means that readers may be less likely to engage with the full text. For this reason we have not added further explanation to each of the quotations in this paper.

In addition, the abstract could describe in a few words the possible application of your research, and I would also like to see the research methods.

Thank you for this helpful comment. We have significantly amended the abstract to provide information about research methods, findings and possible application of the study.

Reviewer 3 Report

I found this study heart-warming and meaningful. Although somewhat sparse in terms of tangible data, the qualitative argument is well-made. Visual examples and quotes from respondents/participants are effectively woven into the narrative.

My only real critique is the claim regarding new theory (see my attached notes). Coining a neologism like 'nature visibilization' (line 74) is just not enough to make this claim. And if you do, then build in more theoretical background to demonstrate that you stand on the shoulders of other scholars and practitioners. I've provided a few examples.

Other than that, congratulations. Well done!

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Well written and well argued. I've included just a couple of suggestions in my notes, attached.

Author Response

Thank you very much for these constructive comments, we very much appreciate the time taken to read our submission so carefully. We respond to them individually below (comment in black and response in purple), with changes to the manuscript highlighted using track changes.

56: lessened

We have amended lessoned to lessened (now line 65).

72/73, c: awkward sentence

We have edited to improve the sentence (now line 88).

74: I don’t think your simple neologism, nature visibilisation, in itself establishes new theory. At the least, you could include some space to acknowledge the leads of:

- David W. Orr (e.g. Earth in Mind; Ecological Literacy, etc.)

- Frederick Turner, including his ideas of ritual and the fine arts

- William Jordan III,

- organizations such as Mission and Values (https://humansandnature.org/missionvalues/)

- Anthropologist E.N. Anderson’s work on traditional societies that managed resources well partly through ritual and artistic representation.

- Several of the essays in Healing Natures, Repairing Relationships by Robert France

- The work of ecological artists Tim Collins and Reiko Goto.

- Artists and educators associated with the Nature Nurture Center, https://nurturenaturecenter.org/programs/art/perspectives-art-on-environment/

Thank you very much for your considered response. We are not purporting to establish a new theory, rather an improved understanding of the issue. We use ‘nature visibilisation’ to encapsulate what we think are influential factors to children’s establishing a closer relationship with nature (and hence, their wellbeing); we are not necessarily arguing that this terminology be adopted, nor that it directly replaces ‘plant blindness’. With this in mind, we agree with your suggestion that it is helpful to clarify this and reference some of these key scholars and resources which inform our work, so we have added in references to them (Orr, 2004; France, 2008; Orr et al., 2005; Richardson, 2003; Goto & Colins, 2005).

- I appreciate the thoughtful approach to referencing ‘plant blindness’!

Thank you, we felt this was really important given the complexity of the term and are grateful that this is apparent.

180: ‘deeper-seated’ ?

We have amended deeper-seeded to deeper-seated (now line 197).

394: which/whose ‘data’?

We have amended this sentence to replace ‘data’ with ‘analysis of children’s drawings’ (now line 428).

479: I love the bee story!

We are pleased that you agree – we certainly think that it is delightful!

Limitations: I’d like to see a bit more thought given to ways to improve inter-rater reliability.

We have added further detail to clarify this in the Data Analysis section (line 331).

Reviewer 4 Report

The choice of article’s topic is very important. Children's relationship with nature and especially with plants is a matter of great importance for our time. Researchers from various scientific fields are involved in the investigation of this issue. And certainly, the arts have an important role to play in strengthening children's relationship with nature. In this context, this article which presents the results of an eco-art project and its contribution to strengthening children’s relationship with nature can contribute significantly to the scientific dialogue.

The article is well-written with a distinct purpose, methodology and results.

The qualitative research methods and the educational activities that were included in the research process add particular interest to the presentation of the research and its results.

 

Listed below are points for reflection and comments and suggestions for improving the manuscript.

 In the theoretical part of the article, perhaps there is no reference to pedagogical research and praxis that strengthen the relationship of children with plants and nature in general either in the context of environmental education or eco-art education. There is such a small trend in the field. Botanical gardens and gardening with children have been widely researched in the framework of environmental education/education for sustainability. There are also other studies that focus on human-plants relationship. Furthermore, there is also a relevant research field in eco-art education. For example, the authors could consult the following sources:

 

Flowers, M., Lipsett, L., & M. J. Barrett (2014). Animism, creativity, and a tree: Shifting into nature connection through attention to subtle energies and contemplative art practice. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 111–126.

Inwood, H. (2008) Mapping eco-art education, Canadian Review of Art Education, 35, 57–73.

Jørgensen, N. J., & Martiny-Bruun, A. (2020). Painting trees in the wind: socio-material ambiguity and sustainability politics in early childhood education with refugee children in Denmark. Environmental Education Research, 26(9-10), 1406-1419.

Tsevreni, I. (2021). Allying with the plants: A pedagogical path towards the Planthroposcene. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(4).

Ward, K. (2013). Creative Arts-Based Pedagogies in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (EfS): Challenges and Possibilities. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 29(2),  165–81.

 

 One point that creates confusion is the focus on plants, which is not reflected in the title of the article or any of the research questions. Thus, without a question about plants specifically, the first section of the results is devoted to the investigation of children's ideas about plants. Children's relationship with plants is very important and the choice of this issue is excellent. However, there is no such question to investigate. Also, the authors define nature as consisting only of animals and plants. They should explain why they make this restrictive choice that directs the analysis of the survey data.

 Also, some other questions and suggestions are the following:

- Could you be a little more specific about the educational activities of the eco-capability project? How were they connected to nature and what elements of the natural world were included in it? Did the natural environment the children visited include plants? What elements of nature were included in the outdoor space visited by children and artists? More generally, were children offered opportunities for experiential contact with plants/nature or through artistic activities?

- Does the field of results include their discussion? Because there is no relevant discussion section in the article. The conclusions might need more reflective writing than simply repeating the research findings. Perhaps this reflects the lack of discussion of the results with the relevant literature.

 

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for these constructive comments, we very much appreciate the time taken to read our submission and are grateful for your thoughtful and positive comments. We respond to them individually below (comment in black and response in purple), with changes to the manuscript highlighted using track changes.

In the theoretical part of the article, perhaps there is no reference to pedagogical research and praxis that strengthen the relationship of children with plants and nature in general either in the context of environmental education or eco-art education. There is such a small trend in the field. Botanical gardens and gardening with children have been widely researched in the framework of environmental education/education for sustainability. There are also other studies that focus on human-plants relationship. Furthermore, there is also a relevant research field in eco-art education. For example, the authors could consult the following sources:

Flowers, M., Lipsett, L., & M. J. Barrett (2014). Animism, creativity, and a tree: Shifting into nature connection through attention to subtle energies and contemplative art practice. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 111–126.

Inwood, H. (2008) Mapping eco-art education, Canadian Review of Art Education, 35, 57–73.

Jørgensen, N. J., & Martiny-Bruun, A. (2020). Painting trees in the wind: socio-material ambiguity and sustainability politics in early childhood education with refugee children in Denmark. Environmental Education Research, 26(9-10), 1406-1419.

Tsevreni, I. (2021). Allying with the plants: A pedagogical path towards the Planthroposcene. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(4).

Ward, K. (2013). Creative Arts-Based Pedagogies in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (EfS): Challenges and Possibilities. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 29(2),  165–81.

Thank you for this suggestion, we have included some of these references to acknowledge the work in the Introduction (Flowers et al., 2014; Inwood, 2008; Tsevreni, 2021).

One point that creates confusion is the focus on plants, which is not reflected in the title of the article or any of the research questions. Thus, without a question about plants specifically, the first section of the results is devoted to the investigation of children's ideas about plants. Children's relationship with plants is very important and the choice of this issue is excellent. However, there is no such question to investigate.

Thank you very much for your comment. We did not set out to focus on plants (as illustrated in the research questions which focus broadly on ‘nature’), although more of children’s drawings included plants within them (Section 4.1). However, the results were that there were similarly large increases in drawings of animals as a main focus (470%) as in drawings of plants as a main focus (483%). Having said that, we have made two changes in response to your comment within the revised manuscript: firstly, we have added a small section to introduce the broader notion of nature and set out our focus on plants and animals in this paper (Section 2.2); and secondly, we have introduced more detail about the artscaping practice in Section 3.2 to illustrate how it encourages interaction with plants and animals.

Also, the authors define nature as consisting only of animals and plants. They should explain why they make this restrictive choice that directs the analysis of the survey data.

This is an interesting point and we agree that ‘nature’ is defined variously by different authors. In response to this, we have added a small section to introduce the broader notion of nature and set out our focus on plants and animals in this paper (Section 2.2). We acknowledge that we have not investigated other aspects of nature beyond animals and plants (e.g. non-living elements of water, sunshine and sky), and have added this as something which would be useful in future research (Section 5.2).

Also, some other questions and suggestions are the following:

- Could you be a little more specific about the educational activities of the eco-capability project? How were they connected to nature and what elements of the natural world were included in it? Did the natural environment the children visited include plants? What elements of nature were included in the outdoor space visited by children and artists? More generally, were children offered opportunities for experiential contact with plants/nature or through artistic activities?

We have added a new paragraph to describe the educational activities of the Eco-Capabilities project in Section 3.2 (from line 278).

- Does the field of results include their discussion? Because there is no relevant discussion section in the article. The conclusions might need more reflective writing than simply repeating the research findings. Perhaps this reflects the lack of discussion of the results with the relevant literature.

We have included discussion and reference to wider literature within the results and analysis, as is possible within this journal. We have made this clearer through amending the subheading for this section, as well as adding to the relevant literature considered, as detailed in response to your points above.